23

Before publication, if a new edition of a source is released, should I try and find the new edition or keep a citation based on the old?

Wrzlprmft
  • 61,194
  • 18
  • 189
  • 288
Jan Möller
  • 239
  • 2
  • 3

4 Answers4

52

Cite the edition of the book you used, as new editions may contain the same text, paragraph or example but on a different page.

Solar Mike
  • 28,097
  • 7
  • 60
  • 100
  • 2
    More importantly, in a different section or under a different number. Pages should only be cited as a last resort. – darij grinberg Nov 01 '17 at 05:36
  • 4
    @darijgrinberg well, Harvard referencing requires the pages used... See http://www.citethisforme.com/harvard-referencing : item 6 is pages used... – Solar Mike Nov 01 '17 at 05:48
  • Not a good convention. Page numbers become meaningless if the text is converted to a mobile/reader-friendly format, or translated. – darij grinberg Nov 01 '17 at 05:58
  • 2
    "Translated" - then you should be using the original anyway... How often are errors due to mistakes or the translators "view" ? – Solar Mike Nov 01 '17 at 06:21
  • 7
    Not everyone has the luxury of reading the language of the original. – darij grinberg Nov 01 '17 at 06:45
  • Still safer to work from the original and then get that translated by someone who can - personal experience has shown me that those who may be "bi-lingual" cannot correctly translate very specific engineering texts for example as they have no knowledge of the detailed concepts. – Solar Mike Nov 01 '17 at 06:56
  • Safer perhaps, but having the choice between original and translations beats just having the original. – darij grinberg Nov 01 '17 at 07:01
  • 9
    @darijgrinberg: As Solar Mike says in his answer, the rule in academia is to cite that edition of the text that you used. If you use a translation, that's fine, but cite the translated edition, and use the page numbers from that if the referencing style requires page numbers. It's not acceptable to pretend that you used the untranslated text if you didn't. If you're using a translation that has not been published (e.g. a Google translation), you can't cite it in an academic context. – Schmuddi Nov 01 '17 at 07:52
  • 2
    @Schmuddi: You're answering to a comment I didn't post :) What I was saying is that citing by some invariant labels (sections, theorem numbers, etc.) beats citing by page because it gives the reader the option to use a translation (at her own risk, in case the translation is bad) or kindle version or whatever else. I am not saying that the author should cite the wrong version. – darij grinberg Nov 02 '17 at 00:52
  • @darij Certainly post chapter and section as well, but include the page number. Nothing more annoying than someone citing a paragraph from a 50 page long chapter and not being more specific. – Voo Nov 02 '17 at 15:45
43

You should cite the exact source of any information you use. If you are pulling your information from a 200-year-old Encyclopedia Britannica, you cite the 200-year-old Encyclopedia Britannica.

However, it is good practice to write based on the current state of knowledge. If the 2010 Encyclopedia Britannica has more up-to-date information, you should use that more recent information, which will drive you to cite the more recent edition. That doesn't mean you need to wait for a new Britannica to publish, but if a new one does appear before you go to print, you may want to spot check it for relevant updates.

(In most fields you probably shouldn't be basing any writing off an encyclopedia, but it's an easy example to think about).

fectin
  • 957
  • 6
  • 10
  • 2
    I think this is the real answer. The question says find a new edition, so I assume they realize it could have changed and the citation might need to be adjusted. OP doesn't want to blindly cite the new edition just because newer. I read the question as "Is there value in citing the most up to date version". – JPhi1618 Nov 01 '17 at 14:20
6

I mainly agree with the first answer by SolarMike, but be aware of the content/information that you cite in this old edition and how old your edition is. The state of the art might change due to new developments in your field and this will be included in the edition. If you, for example, then criticise the book for not including X or Y, but it is done in the most recent edition, this would have been an easy mistake to avoid.

Regarding the year of the edition, sometimes, valuable editings are made for the newest edition of a book. It might be interesting for you to check these - just that you are aware of. For instance, the author changes this specific argument that you use due to criticisms of the first edition (or puts in an extended chapter or so).

Stefan_W
  • 987
  • 6
  • 16
  • So, should you wait for the new edition to appear before you publish your paper "just in case the argument changes" and you re-write your paper or should you publish with what is current and effectively accepted at the moment? – Solar Mike Oct 31 '17 at 14:21
  • I haven't said wait for the new edition (how should most of us know anyway, whether a new edition of book X will be published soon...), but if you know(!) that the cited version is out now in a new (revised) edition, then you can just check it (and that you know "what is current and effectively accepted at the moment") – Stefan_W Oct 31 '17 at 17:32
  • As to how to know when a new version of a book will be available - most publishers will be able, and happy, to tell you - in fact, faculty often receive pre-published copies for review... – Solar Mike Oct 31 '17 at 17:42
  • 3
    "I mainly agree with the former comment" What former comment? If you wish to refer to another comment or answer, please link it so that people know what you're talking about. (You can get a link to an answer by clicking the "share" link below it, and you can get a link to a comment by clicking on its timestamp.) If you are referring to a comment, you should quote it as well as linking to it, since comments are often deleted. – David Richerby Oct 31 '17 at 19:11
4

There are of course cases where you might want to deliberately cite an older edition. For example, if it contained information that has been removed from newer editions; or if you want cite erroneous information "Until recently it was widely believed that.... This belief appears to derive from ....". Or you might want to cite Fowler 1st ed as evidence of what was considered acceptable English usage at the time it was published. Or you might believe that earlier editors got something right and later editors got it wrong.

I can also imagine cases where you want to cite an earlier edition simply because it is much more widely available, or because you cannot get hold of a later edition despite best efforts.

Michael Kay
  • 1,591
  • 11
  • 12